3 ms·
> instead of Citation needed. People did not stop talking to family, friends and colleagues just because they're able to leverage LLMs.
by lanfeust6 4mo ago
> instead of
Citation needed. People did not stop talking to family, friends and colleagues just because they're able to leverage LLMs.
- dragonwriter 4mo ago> People did not stop talking to family, friends and colleagues just because they're able to leverage LLMs. Which people? There are clearly people who did—some with catastrophic, newsworthy results, but presumably more without.
- jimbokun 4mo agoNo, they stopped talking to family, friends and colleagues because they got addicted to social media algorithms.
- lanfeust6 4mo agoand other forms of multi-media before that.
- btilly 4mo agoNot everyone did. But many now talk less. Why? AI psychosis is real. People who talk to LLMs too much, get used to them sucking up. Real humans feel jarring after that. (Just like people who get used to being in echo chambers, stop wanting to interact outside of those echo chambers.) After someone has an answer from an LLM, often that replaces reasons we would have talked to others. (See the OP for examples.)
- lanfeust6 4mo agoI've yet to see anything substantiating these anecdotes.
- btilly 4mo agoIf this does not fit your personal experience, then I have no percentage in trying to convince you. It does fit the personal experiences of a wide variety of people that I've talked to about it. Including therapists who are having to deal with the fallout within families of these dynamics. If you wait a few years, I'm sure that peer reviewed research will catch up with the current social phenomena. But by then there will be some other fairly new social phenomena where common experience is ahead of the research.